Campus Progress wants to make sure that students are able to make their voices heard in Washington. That's why we are offering travel grants of up to $300 for students organizing carpools or vans from their campus to the capital.
1.Financial Need 2. Number of Students the Grant Will Assist 3.Planned Involvement (For example - Are you going to write a blog post about the rally? Will you be attending the lobby day as well?)
Funds are limited, so we will not be able to help everyone.
If you are a student and you are interested in this Campus Progress travel adventure there are more details and other resources at the link.
Oh yeah! Right! Like you really thought you were going to get a "spring break" vacation in the sun? Jojn Campus Progress and maybe you can learn to organize that one yourself. :)
In his farewell speech after two years as chairman, Mr. Mehlman said that the 2006 elections, in which Republicans lost control of both houses of Congress, was not a fluke that could be attributed to the calendar, a few scandal-tainted candidates and the tough going in Iraq.
“Each of these factors combined to create an environment that was unfavorable for Republicans,” said Mr. Mehlman, one of the chief architects of President Bush’s two national election victories. “But, folks, these factors cannot be an excuse.”
He said that if Republican officials shrugged off the repudiation of the party in the 2006 elections they would lose the White House in 2008 and remain in the minority in Congress indefinitely. He said the party had to recommit itself to political reform, fiscal restraint and personal ethics.
Mr. Mehlman addressed the roughly 170 members of the Republican National Committee at their annual winter meeting, a rather glum affair at a downtown hotel here. Party members are still nursing the wounds of the mid-term elections and are riven by divisions over Iraq, immigration and other issues. Members are also beginning to take sides in the contest for the Republican presidential nomination in 2008.
These Republicans could save themselves a lot of time, trouble and money and just worry about which Democratic party candidate they will vote for. At this rate they will have some of the freeper and Redstate supporters that might vote for the GOP, the faaarthest of the faaaar right, perhaps a some support from "lifers", then there will be those that just stay home disillusioned... and then there will be nothing, absolutely nothing, from any independents/unaffiliateds.
Republicans may as well try and buy themselves another Lieberclone out of the DLC side of the Democratic party and hope they can fool the progressives. It would be the closest thing they could ever get to a win, at this rate, if they succeeded. heh
Bush and the Neoconservatives will kill the GOP off completely. They are the epitome of ideology over party. The ONLY CHANCE the GOP has is if they force Bush to stop... And it is apparent that if the GOP wants to survive it will depend on them removing Bush and Cheney from office. Because that is the only way they will stop Bush. And they know it.
I am sure the Democratic party will help you on this one... But it will be up to the Republicans to make the first moves. It remains to be seen whether or not the Republicans have the balls they will need to save their own party.
The GOP will still lose in '08. But it won't be the complete and total death of the GOP if they stop Bush.
"Resolution against Bush policy gains momentum As the U.S. Senate prepares to vote on a non-binding resolution opposing President Bush's plan to escalate the war in Iraq, the White House is once again trying to define support of the president as support of the troops.
"The one thing the president has said is, whatever you do, make sure you support the troops," said White House press secretary Tony Snow. "And the question people who support this resolution will have to ask is, how does this support the troops?"
Shame on Snow.
American military personnel have performed heroically in Iraq, despite the many failures that have made their mission more difficult and more dangerous."
Yes, American soldiers have done the best they can given the dysfunctional leadership that had no real plans AND have refused to give the American soldiers the proper equipment to do the job safely. But this situation is only multiplied exponentially by the fact that the Iraqis have never been given the tools they need to take over the job there:
Quotes like that show that the president is either: A) delusional; or B) is purposely trying to keep us there by refusing to get Iraqi soldiers going in the right direction; C) a bit of both. How are the Iraqis ever supposed to take over a job - you know, stand up so we can stand down - that the American soldiers have been unable to handle if the Iraqis are even more ill-equiped than the American soldiers?
Frankly, we don't care anymore about whether or not bush is failing because he is delusional or if he is failing to continue war-profiteering, or any other number of reasons that could explain his failed policies. We have had enough of his failure for whatever reasons.
The president had the opportunity to forge a new Iraq strategy and win congressional and public support. Instead, he has offered a dressed-up version of his failed stay-the-course strategy.
Just how much of this is dressed-up "Stay the Course!" BS? Take a look at this graph showing troop levels past, present and future (If the incompetent bush gets his way):
WHOA! Is this a familiar pattern? And someone out there representing CT supports this rinse and repeat policy? Sure enough, Bush can always count on Joe Neocon Lieberman:
During his campaign last fall, U.S. Sen. Joseph Lieberman claimed he was ready to carefully scrutinize the president's policies on Iraq. Safely re-elected, Lieberman is as enthusiastic as ever about Bush's policies and plans for escalation.
Umm? That isn't quite what Joe said before the elections... Here is the money quote provided in an excerpt from Matt Browner Hamlin at MLN:
"David Sirota has a can't-miss op-ed in the San Francisco Chronicle on what politicians and pundits said about Iraq before the war and if any of them have taken responsibility for their words since the war has become a disaster. John Edwards famously owned up to his mistake of voting for the war, but we know that he's an exception not the rule. Joe Lieberman, on the other hand, is more of the rule than the exception.
Similarly, consider U.S. Sen. Joseph Lieberman (Independent-Conn.). Facing a difficult Democratic primary challenge, Lieberman said of Iraq in July that "the sooner we are out the better," and that, by the end of 2006, he would support efforts to "begin to draw down significant numbers of American troops." He later said that "no one wants to end the war in Iraq more than I do and bring our troops home." But weeks after being re-elected, Lieberman is now leading the charge for military escalation, sending a letter to President Bush last week saying, "[I] strongly encourage you to send additional American troops to Iraq."
Pundits and news analysts are employed to expose this sort of nonsense so that our democratic discourse -- and the policy choices that come out of it -- are grounded in fact. But that has not happened. Instead, we have seen a furious stampede by the most prominent media figures to cover their own hides with either more lies, or more out-of-the mainstream bluster.
Lieberman's hypocrisy and intellectual shallowness is the model for "liberal" hawks like Joe Klein and Tom Friedman. The lack of incrimination of people like Lieberman for their damaging public positions and subsequent shunning of guilt for their words and actions imperils the future of our nation to handle crises of national security and national conscience. Sirota nails this home with his concluding paragraphs.
How can we expect to change course in Iraq, if a president is given a pass to claim he has never stayed the course in the first place? How can we expect to hold lawmakers accountable if they are never questioned about their efforts to deliberately mislead us? How can we expect the media to be a watchdog if its leading analysts and news framers face no public sanctions when they disrespect the truth or give credence to fringe ideologies?
A country whose national political conversation is dominated by voices that deny their own complicity in national security tragedies; downplay human casualties, and generally make dishonesty mundane, is a nation prevented from reflecting on its bad decisions -- and thus is doomed to repeat such bad decisions in the future.
Demanding that the proponents of war accept their failures of vision and the consequences of these failures is crucial to avoiding a repetition of the calamity in Iraq."
Yep! What they said... It is the responsibility of these newspapers to dig a little deeper and point out the lunacy of positions taken by liars like Joe Lieberman.
"This has to be a milestone: A new poll has found that the American people dislike President Bush more than they dislike ... Dick Cheney. The poll — by Fox News, of all people — finds that President Bush's unfavorable rating is 58%, while Cheney's unpopularity rating is five points lower at 53%. Bush can, however, still take some small solace from the fact that his approval rating is one point higher than Cheney's; the President's is 38%, while the VP's is 37%.
Meanwhile, here are a couple of other numbers that are striking for a Fox poll: Only 39% of Americans view the GOP favorably, and 49% view them unfavorably. Meanwhile, a majority of respondents — 51% — have a favorable view of Dems, compared to only 35% who have an unfavorable view of what Fox likes to call the "Democrat Party.""
Holy wingnut crap! They hate Bush more than Cheney? With all of the bush failures there is no doubt why Fox propaganda can no longer even prop up any support for their beloved GOP wingnuts.
Murdoch and O'liely must be crying into thir GOP talking points right about now...
'It's a fool's errand,' said Gen. Barry McCaffrey. 'Our allies are leaving us,' he said. 'Make no mistake about that. Most will be gone by this summer.'
Retired Marine Corps Gen. Joseph P. Hoar, said, 'The new strategy reflects the inability of the administration to get it right.' He said, 'The proposed solution to send in more troops won't work. It is far too little and too late.'"
Not to mention that Republican Olympia Snowe has joined Hagel in crossing the aisle to support slapping the idiot-bush-boy's policy down.
So far, Sens. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska and Olympia Snowe of Maine are the only Republicans to announce their backing for the Senate measure. A third lawmaker, Sen. Gordon Smith, R-Ore., signaled during the day he is giving serious consideration to joining them.
I would be willing to bet (IF I were a gambling man, I am not!) that as long as the failing bush continues killing his own GOP's integrity, and any chances of other GOP candidates getting re-elected in the future, by continuing his ESCALATION policiy you will start seeing some of the more moderate GOP members asking if they can pemanently cross the aisle...
On January 22nd - the 34th anniversary of Roe v. Wade - we are asking pro-choice bloggers to join us in a day of activism for choice. Blog for Choice Day is a chance to raise the profile of reproductive rights issues in the blogosphere and the media, and to let everyone know that a woman's right to choose is nonnegotiable.
This year's topic is a simple one: tell us, and your readers, why you're pro-choice.
Sign up for Blog for Choice Day below to let us know that you're planning on devoting at least one post on January 22nd to sharing the story behind your pro-choice beliefs. You can download a Blog for Choice Day sidebar graphic to let your readers know that you're participating. We'll send you a reminder, and link to your post here. You can also tag your posts with "Blog for Choice" to show you're joining in.
If you're not a blog or a website, please encourage your favorite sites to take part in Blog for Choice Day!
Together we can ensure that the blogosphere is flooded on January 22nd with pro-choice voices.
This is one of the reasons I became involved in the multi-blogger "Anti-Alito-Brigade" effort...
OK... So everyone is losing out with Climate Change:
The cost of climate change: A state of Washington report on the effects of climate change said “It’s safe to say that virtually every aspect of the state’s economy will be affected by climate change.” This includes higher prices for lumber, water, and crops and additional expenses to protect shorelines from flooding.But of course it’s not just Washington, it’s happening in all the states. Plant zones shifted one zone north from 1990-2006, Sue says, what happens when Connecticut (where we’re moving to) becomes California? And what will the climate in southern California be like in 10 years?
But California will also lose with a Blogger that gives a damn about these things moving to Connecticut. If the Blogger sticks around long enough we may even be able to give him a warm California welcome here in CT... I guess it is a good-news-bad-news kindof thing, eh?
No offense, but I really like my winters with snow!
“If you want America to be a hegemonic power in the Middle East, you’re out of step with the American people. We’re not going to fight it out with Iran for the next 30 years to see who the big shit — I’m sorry — the big name is on the block.”
He also said a naughty word... But who really gives a shit about that?
There are not many details in the report but Sen. Dodd has made the obvious first move in stopping the reckless Bush administration from ESCALATING the failed Bush war.
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Connecticut, is hoping to become a strong voice against President Bush's plan to increase U.S. troops in Iraq.
The presidential candidate introduced legislation Tuesday that put a limit on the number of troops in Iraq at about 132,000.
Dodd's bill also would require congressional approval in order for any additional troops to be sent to Iraq. This is the kind of thing that needs a push and a shove from every Senators' constituants. Start dialing and Emailing! and ask them to support this.
[update]A PDF of the beginings of the bill Via Gabe at CLP:
My initial reaction is that this legislation has a better chance of passing than does Senator Kennedy’s legislation denying funding for a troop escalation (which Senator Dodd also supports) and also has a much better chance of surviving the sure veto. This legislation has the potential to attract more Republicans who have become disillusioned about Iraq.
I like that Dodd is doing this but there is always Kenedy’s bill to consider as well. In the case of the reckless bush administration it would be safer and wiser to back whichever bill has more controls. Also, Hillary Clinton is on record as supporting the same sort of idea as Dodd's bill. Though, Clinton makes no mention of any bill.
Obama takes 1st step in presidential bid Obama announced his intentions to file a presidential exploratory committee on his Web site. He said he would announce more about his plans in his hometown of Chicago on Feb. 10.
"I didn't expect to find myself in this position a year ago," Obama said in a video posting. "I've been struck by how hungry we all are for a different kind of politics. So I spent some time thinking about how I could best advance the cause of change and progress we so desperately need.
"The decisions that have been made in the past six years have put our country in a precarious place," he said.
[update]There was speculation on MSNBC that Hillary Clinton may have cancelled her plans to announce her running today because shortly after Obama's announcement she postponed/cancelled a news gaggle she had planned.
A group of more than 50 active-duty military officers will deliver a petition to Congress on Tuesday signed by about 1,000 troops calling for an end to the U.S. occupation of Iraq. "Any troop increase over here will just produce more sitting ducks, more targets," said Sergeant Ronn Cantu, who is serving in Iraq.
Under the 1988 Military Whistleblower Protection Act, active duty military, National Guard, and Reservists may communicate with any member of Congress without fear of reprisal, even if copies of the communication are sent to others.
This YouTube video is a pretty crappy quality one but it has Mr. Bush saying what you need to know about his education process for increasing troops:
Mr. Bush says he "thinks" he can just ignore Congress and ESCALATE the war in Iraq. Meanwhile Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA) introduced a resolution requiring Mr. Bush to gain new congressional authorization (PDF) before escalating the War in Iraq:
The legislation requires the Congress to vote before the President escalates troop levels in Iraq.
The legislation claims the people’s right to a full voice in the President’s plan to send more troops into the Iraq civil war. It says that no funds can be spent to send additional troops to Iraq unless Congress approves the President’s proposed escalation of American forces.
The Iraq War Resolution of 2002 authorized a war against the regime of Saddam Hussein because he was believed to have weapons of mass destruction and an operational relationship with Al Qaeda, and was in defiance of U.N. Security Council Resolutions.
The mission of our armed forces today in Iraq no longer bears any resemblance to the mission authorized by Congress.
Iraq has descended into civil war and sectarian violence continues to escalate. …
President Bush should not be permitted to increase the number of United States troops in harm’s way in the civil war without a specific new authorization from Congress.
As for what Mr. Bush "thinks" he can do... The precedence is already there to shut down his effort to continue failure and he has no choice but to bow to Congress:
December 1970. P.L. 91-652 — Supplemental Foreign Assistance Law. The Church-Cooper amendment prohibited the use of any funds for the introduction of U.S. troops to Cambodia or provide military advisors to Cambodian forces.
December 1974. P.L. 93-559 — Foreign Assistance Act of 1974. The Congress established a personnel ceiling of 4000 Americans in Vietnam within six months of enactment and 3000 Americans within one year.
June 1983. P.L. 98-43 — The Lebanon Emergency Assistance Act of 1983. The Congress required the president to return to seek statutory authorization if he sought to expand the size of the U.S. contingent of the Multinational Force in Lebanon.
June 1984. P.L. 98-525 — The Defense Authorization Act. The Congress capped the end strength level of United States forces assigned to permanent duty in European NATO countries at 324,400. November 1993. P.L. 103-139. The Congress limited the use of funding in Somalia for operations of U.S. military personnel only until March 31, 1994, permitting expenditure of funds for the mission thereafter only if the president sought and Congress provided specific authorization.
Mr. Bush is sadly mistaken if he thinks he can play politics with soldiers lives, in an effort to push his Iraqi failures onto the next administration without Congress stepping in, and rightfully so, to shut him down.
It must really suck to be in the miniscule minority of Constitutional-ignoring, warmongerring, neocon-ass-kissing, failed-ideology-embracing, far-right-wingut-bush-loving spin doctor right about now. Because no amount of Bush propaganda from those screaming idiots is going to educate anyone...
John Edwards is sneaking into Hillary's home turf to deliver a message that we need to consider cutting the funding because of W's loony proposal of escalation:
On Sunday, January 14th, Senator John Edwards will speak at Riverside Church in Harlem in honor of Martin Luther King, Jr. In his address, Edwards will speak about the the Iraq war escalation. Watch the video for a preview.
Once this kindof messaging sets sail look for Hillary to stick her finger in the air and pick up on this message long after everyone else... Leading from the rear, as per usual.
You can also watch a live webcast of Senator Edwards speaking at Riverside Church at 4 PM EST on Sunday, January 14 by clicking here.
“ Members of Congress have a right to express their views, and express them forcefully. But those who refuse to give this plan a chance to work have an obligation to offer an alternative that has a better chance for success. To oppose everything while proposing nothing is irresponsible.”
Over and over again we have proposed the only real solution left to you, and you refuse to listen to it because of your vanity Mr. Bush... Redeployment.
America is Ready for Change
By Lawrence J. Korb, Brian Katulis
November 8, 2006
When the new Congress takes office in January, it will be time to get serious about America's strategy in Iraq. It's time to change course.
That's why today we ask the president, his handpicked Iraq Study Group (led by former Secretary of State James Baker and former Indiana congressman Lee H. Hamilton), and congressional leaders to consider our reasoned, pragmatic plan to strategically redeploy our military forces in Iraq and around the region to fight our terrorist enemies in the most effective and most lethal fashion possible.
One year ago the Center for American Progress issued its first report calling for a responsible exit from Iraq as part of a balanced global strategy to make Americans safer. We reiterated that call six months later as subsequent events only underscored the need to act on our proposals. Today, the situation in Iraq is even more dire.
Violence in Iraq is spiraling out of control as it turns inward, with sectarian killings surpassing deaths from terrorist bombings and militias splintering the country. Squabbling among Iraqi leaders makes matters worse. America simply must adjust to the grim realities on the ground.
The Bush administration's mistakes in Iraq - invading for the wrong reasons and without enough troops to secure the country - have left us with no good options. It's understandable that a growing number of Americans are calling for an immediate withdrawal, but we believe that would only further destabilize Iraq and much of the Middle East. Accordingly, we are calling for a comprehensive strategic redeployment from Iraq by the end of 2007 that will:
Restore the strength of U.S. ground troops.
Exercise a strategic shift to meet global threats from Islamist extremists.
Prevent U.S. troops from being caught in the middle of a civil war in Iraq.
Avert mass sectarian and ethnic cleansing in Iraq.
Provide time for Iraq's elected leaders to strike a power-sharing agreement.
Empower Iraq's security forces to take control.
Get those Iraqis fighting to end the occupation to lay down their arms.
Motivate the U.N., global, and regional powers to get more involved in Iraq.
Give the U.S. the moral, political, and military power to deal with Iran's attempt to develop nuclear weapons.
Prevent an outbreak of isolationism in the United States.
The end goals of this strategic shift are clear, but to accomplish it the United States must implement a policy of strategic redeployment that:
Reduces U.S. troops to 60,000 by the end of 2006 and to zero by the end of 2007, while redeploying troops to Afghanistan, Kuwait, and the Persian Gulf.
Engages in diplomacy to resolve the conflict within Iraq by convening a Geneva Peace Conference modeled on the Dayton Accords.
Establishes a Gulf Security initiative to deal with the aftermath of U.S. redeployment from Iraq and the growing nuclear capabilities of Iran.
Puts Iraq's reconstruction back on track with targeted international funds.
Counters extremist Islamic ideology around the globe through long-term efforts to support the creation of democratic institutions and press freedoms.
Only after the United States has set the conditions for redeployment out of Iraq in order to engage the global strategic threats our nation faces can Americans rest assured that they will be safer. For more details on the report, please see our executive summary, the full report, and related materials gathered by the Center for American Progress elsewhere on our website.
Change a few of those dates on those strategy suggestions and it is still a working plan that would have us down to 60,000 soldiers being used as Iraqi insurgents targets by mid 2007.
The problem for Bush is not that we don't have a plan... It is that it makes him and his failed White House administration take responsibility for their failures before Bush is out of office. And Bush is not man enough to accept his failure gracefully. Bush would rather play politics with the soldiers lives.
Senate To Deny Pensions To Convicted Lawmakers: "“Members of Congress convicted of serious crimes would lose their taxpayer-paid pensions, sometimes totaling more than $100,000 a year, under a measure unanimously approved by the Senate Friday.”"
This sure as heck makes a lot of sense but it will make a lot of Republicans unhappy. heh
The Pentagon has abandoned its limit on the time a citizen-soldier can be required to serve on active duty, officials said Thursday, a major change that reflects an Army stretched thin by longer-than-expected combat in Iraq.
An Air Force staff sergeant who posed nude for Playboy magazine has been relieved of her duties while the military investigates, officials said Thursday.
In February's issue, hitting newsstands this week, Michelle Manhart is photographed in uniform yelling and holding weapons under the headline "Tough Love." The following pages show her partially clothed, wearing her dog tags while working out, as well as completely nude.
snip
"Of what I did, nothing is wrong, so I didn't anticipate anything, of course," Manhart, 30, told The Associated Press. "I didn't do anything wrong, so I didn't think it would be a major issue."
I have never heard of any soldier dropping their clothes for a magazine and not getting the boot from the military, so I doubt she will be the exception to the rule.
It looks like Anne Coulter may have even more felonies on his record at the end of his voter fraud investigation:
The BRAD BLOG: "Newly added to the previously known allegations of Voter Fraud --- when Coulter used her realtor's address instead of her own on her Voter Registration Application --- is the allegation by the Palm Beach Police Department that Coulter seems to also have given that same, incorrect address when applying for a driver's license after moving to the tony Sunshine State 'hood, where her fellow GOP propagandist Rush Limbaugh has recently had his own troubles following the rule of law.
The allegation concerning Driver's License Fraud would be yet another third degree felony, according to the Palm Beach Police Department report!"
(h/t to the CTnewsjunkie that broke all of this first)
OK. He has worked on the Green party campaign for the Governor, the Lamont campaign for Senate, and does a lot of Blogging and work as an indie Journalist. Apparently he is perceived as a serious enough threat to our paranoid Governor Jodi Rell that he was arrested at her innaugural prade.
"HARTFORD, Conn. -- Gov. M. Jodi Rell's security detail only watched when a woman left the sidewalk and quickly walked toward Rell during the inaugural parade Wednesday. The woman shook Rell's hand and melted into the crowd.
But a slightly built man who jumped off a mountain bike and ran into the parade route ahead of Rell was intercepted by a state trooper and arrested by a Hartford police officer.
One difference in the way the two incursions were handled: A state police intelligence unit had previously identified the man, Ken Krayeske, as a political activist and potential threat.
A potential threat? What was so threatening about Krayeske that the Trooper had to step in and grab him? And why, and how, had they identified him?
Hartford Det. Jeff Antuna wrote in his report that Krayeske hp/2007/01/0drew his attention by rapidly riding up to the parade route near Bushnell Park, dumping his bike and running to a position in front of Rell.
"I immediately recognized the accused as Kenneth Krayeske from the photograph provided by the state police," Antuna wrote.
A state police detective intercepted Krayeske. When Antuna grabbed his arm, police said, Krayeske pulled away.
Photograph provided by State Police? Huh??? According to the Hartford police officers report the State had given the local Hartford police photographs of activists that might be considered threats to "Her Excellency" Governor Jodi Rell.
His lawyer says Krayeske apparently came to the attention of state police by heckling Rell during a campaign stop in Glastonbury last year over her refusal to debate his candidate, Clifford Thornton.
"Are there little circles of law-enforcement officers who have lists of who is naughty and who is nice?" asked Krayeske's lawyer, Norm Pattis. "What is the criteria for inclusion?"
Speaking on behalf of the state police, Lt. J. Paul Vance had nothing to say about how Kreyeske came to the State Police intelligence unit's OR the Connecticut Intelligence Centers attention. He did admit that these unit's do share information and intelligence. Speaking on behalf of Nutmeggers... I knew they shared information, but I had no clue so many agencies were watching all of us?
As for the list:
Nancy Mulroy, a Hartford police spokeswoman, played down the list, saying Krayeske was arrested for his actions.
Pay no attention to the McCarthy inspired list! Just move along to the dangerous actions of Krayeske... OK, Let's do that for the moment. Situation, according to the Hartford police:
"List or no list, if you rush off a bike and start charging toward the governor during a processional parade, you are going to be arrested," Mulroy said. "In this day and age, when security is a very serious matter, you cannot expect to act like that and not have to face the consequences. Our job was to protect the governor, and we took it seriously."
According to The Courant article there was a witness to back up the police version of the arrest. Eliot Streim:
Streim, a Hartford lawyer who was watching the parade with a colleague, said police did not intercept Krayeske as he ran into the parade route. On the contrary, Krayeske photographed the governor without incident and was detained by police only after Rell had passed by, Streim said.
Well? He did back them up against the wall. Straim's version seems to leave a lot of doubt about the police version of the arrest.
OK... Someone is lying, and the only one I can see with nothing to gain or lose here is the Lawyer/witness. Can Krayeske shed any light on what he was doing at the parade? Take a look:
He was taking pictures! That was a photo taken by Krayeske shortly before he was arrested. Does that look like a photo that someone charging at Granny Paranoia might be able to take? Half of my pictures come out blurry even when I am standing as still as I can. That is a damned good picture considering the subject. (FYI: Krayeske is having a caption contest for the photo to poke fun at inauguRellgate, and celebrate the glorious circumstances of his arrest and 13 hours in jail)
It is bad enough that this guy got arrested for taking pictures, but what is a really scary thought is that Connecticut now has a "LIST" of potential dangegerously threatening people that seems to include peaceful activists like Bloggers, Journalists, campaign volunteers, and obviously photographers.
So now we have a "List", an apparently ginned up arrest, spying on peaceful political activists... And yes he is your typical peaceful activist. Ctnewsjunkie fills in some of Kreyeske's info:
Krayeske was working as a freelance photojournalist at the time of the arrest Wednesday. He also runs a Web site The 40 Year Plan. He was previously arrested in 2003 for demonstrating against the war. In 2004 Krayeske worked on Ralph Nader's presidential campaign and in 2005 he traveled to Syria to report on the war. He has also contributed stories and photos to ctnewsjunkie.com
Atalbot at MLN can give you a little more background on Krayeske.
Now to the last little part in this story: What helped to get all of Connectucut's various secret and not so secret policing efforts and attention and put him on the "LIST". According to Maura at MLN:
Whose going to protest the inaugural ball Jan. 3 with me? No need to make nice after watching this documentary about CJTS
Paz hasn't yet connected this comment to the aspect of this whole outrage that I think is nearly as interesting as the revelation that CTIC has a list of political activists deemed troublesome to Rell -- the fact that the bond for Krayeske was set at the absurdly high level of $75,000.
Since Ken couldn't make this bond, he was kept in lockup all afternoon and night...and then mysteriously sprung without having to make bond at all, simply on promise to appear, at 1:00 AM.
Rell's inaugural ball, which Ken commented at CLP that he'd like to protest, ended at 1:00 AM.
Krayeske is a freelance writer and photographer and his only intention was to photograph "Her Excellency" Governor Jodi Rell. They arrested him on ginned up charges, and held him until after that Rell's ball ended. You have seen most of the the evidence. Do I raelly need to tell you what to make of this?
Pattis called the police department's version "ridiculous," accusing them of "lying and making it up as they go along."
Equally important, he said, is the question of the surveillance and whether Krayeske and other political activists and freelance journalists are being investigated and monitored.
The number of other people on the list and their identities were not available Friday.
"It's not a crime in this country to be a political activist, at least not yet," Pattis said. "It's not apparent that Mr. Krayeske broke any law, it's not apparent that he did anything that any of the rest of us are not allowed to do. This is sort of, police state run riot."
A spokesman for the governor's office declined to comment Friday.
CT police and not so secret police (not secret anymore) have stepped in it big time, and all for the benefit of our paranoid GOP Governor Jodi Rell. They have crossed way over the line of what their stated purposes are. Just check Colin McEnroe's site to see the proof of that:
I am trying to stay with this story as I do the show. I now have the police report on the arrest of Ken Krayeske. The information about him seems to have come, at least partly, from the Connecticut Intelligence Center, a creature of Homeland Security.
Here is its stated purpose. I fail to see how it includes monitoring members of the Green Party:
* Connecticut Intelligence Center
The DEMHS Statewide Anti-Terrorism Task Force is now co-located with the FBI Joint Terrorism Task Force, in an effort to streamline investigations and response to terrorism-related allegations and incidents. A key component of this investigative and law enforcement asset created in 2005 is the Connecticut Intelligence Center ("CTIC"), a multi-agency collaborative operation that includes representatives of the FBI, DEMHS, Connecticut State Police, municipal law enforcement agencies and the U.S. Coast Guard.
CTIC collects, analyzes and disseminates both criminal and terrorism related intelligence to all law enforcement agencies in Connecticut. Serving as a statewide central resource to affect intelligence sharing, CTIC also acts to identify emerging threats and trends. CTIC produces a number of intelligence reports and bulletins, including the CTIC Weekly Briefing and has conducted three seminars for state and local law enforcement professionals. The seminars have helped increase the knowledge of local law enforcement professionals in dealing with terrorist prevention and incidents.
And like the typical GOP low-life she personifies Jodi Rell will likely do nothing and say nothing about this until everyone dogpiles on her. She would prefer to just try and sweep it under the rug. What she didn't count on was that not only has the Blogosphere latched on to this, BUT the MSM has grabbed this one early and has done a lot of digging as well.
Rep. Mike Lawlor (D-East Haven) and CO-Chair of the Judiciary Committee had this to say (Courtesy of Spazeboy.net) at a Capitol briefing: Part 1 (Length 09:00):
Lawlor is correct:
"This type of conduct, which I guess you could categorize as "bushist" for a want of a better expression in this day and age will not be tolerated in this state."
Part 2 (Length (09:54):
"That, to me, reeks of secret police..."
Part 3 (Length (08:50):
"This is clearly an attempt to intimidate a journalist"..."This is the result of the emergence Bloggers on the political scene"..."This not traditional journalism, its different, slightly more in your face, and appropriately so, because a lot of people can't get away with what they used to in the good old days, not the politicians, not the police, and a lot of other people, and I think this is healthy for the process."..."I think this motivated more by politics than law enforcement"
"It begs the question: "Who else is on that list?"" And also a reference to this snippet from a post as supposed reasoning for Krayeske's outrageous treatment:
I scoped the area because I hoped to snap some photos of Rell during the inaug. I want file shots so when I report on her governance, I can have fresh images for the loyal viewing audience. Unfortunately, according to Mr. Harris, I won't have much access:
Shocking! He was planning to take Photographs!
Part 4 (Length 09:12):
Q: "Are you going to ask for copies of that list and are you going to make it public?"
A: "Absolutely. We will get to the bottom of this and we will do it publicly."
Also, there is a reference to The letter (Via ctblogger) from Jodi Rell that is about a dollar short and a few days too late for me to believe that she is doing anything but spinning:
Colin McEnroe just posted this on his blog. Seems like the events surrounding the arrest of Ken Krayeske is going to turn into a full-scale investigation. McEnroe just posted this letter Gov. Rell sent to Department of Public Safety Commissioner Leonard Boyle.
January 8, 2007
Commissioner Leonard Boyle
Department of Public Safety
1111 Country Club Road Middletown, Connecticut 06457
Dear Commissioner Boyle:
I am writing with regard to the incident last week involving Kenneth Krayeske which led to his arrest by the Hartford Police Department.
I recognize that security assessments are by necessity comprehensive, and I understand that our State and local law enforcement agencies must work together and share information. Law enforcement agencies also have the difficult job of assessing the information they receive. Nonetheless, I was disturbed to read in media reports allegations regarding the existence of a list of individuals.
It is my expectation that all State Police information is maintained in strict compliance with federal law. In this environment of heightened security, the use of information must be balanced with the individual rights of our citizens. In providing security and protection, we cannot permit the rights of individuals to be trampled.
The parade was a public event, and moreover an event at which public participation was invited. People also have a right to protest – and that right is one of the fundamental freedoms of our state and nation.
Most importantly, security procedures must be uniform and consistent in order to safeguard both the people and places of Connecticut as well as our basic freedoms.
Accordingly, I am requesting that you review the circumstances of this incident. Specifically, I would like to know how this individual came to the attention of State Police and the circumstances under which his name and photo were provided to the Hartford Police Department.
In addition, I am requesting that you evaluate existing procedures to ensure that information gathered by the State Police is reliable and reported to other law enforcement agencies in a responsible manner.
Sincerely,
M Jodi Rell
GOVERNOR
The events surrounding freelance journalist Ken Krayeske's arrest is getting stranger by the second as the outrage mounts.
The letter came out shortly before the planned press conference by Lawlor. Can you get any more "spin reactionary" than that?
As you can see... Lawlor and the other members of the press conference are truely shocked about this and are taking this all very seriously as far as it being a serious abuse of Krayeske's rights and the rights of any other "innocent victims" of the list.
I'll close this out with a humoorous interview by Ct Bob (with Maura) of Krayeske at the Branford BRRRoadwater "polar bear swim": (length 05:18)
You don't know who I am BUT you are welcome! :) There are many people that will do what we can to support you.
There is an appeal for funds to help cover his legal costs if you want to help a fellow Blogger/Activist/Journalist/Photographer/Citizen!
Update II: This one’s major. It turns out that Krayeske’s application for a grant from the SPJ’s Legal Defense Fund was published without his knowledge or consent. I feel like a rube for re-posting an excerpt, but I did so only because I know that many of us are interested in contributing toward the payment of his legal bills. All that’s left of this post is the info below, which is the only legit way to contribute to Ken Krayeske’s legal defense.
if you wish to promote liberty, protect freedom of speech and stop false arrests of journalists and/or political activists, please help me out. You can make out checks to “Law Offices of Norman A. Pattis,” and in the memo line write “Ken Krayeske Legal Defense Fund.” Send the checks to
Ken Krayeske Legal Defense Fund c/o Law Offices of Norman Pattis 649 Amity Road Bethany, CT 06524
I repeat that this is the one and only certified way to contribute to my legal defense at this point and time. Thank you all in advance for your assistance, and I am humbled by the amount of emotional support I have received to this point.
Sen. Dodd announces 2008 bid: "Dodd, a 26-year Senate veteran, told the “Imus in the Morning” radio show he will file paperwork to establish a campaign committee later in the day.
“I know how to do this. I know what has to be done. I’m going to get out and make my case,” Dodd said. He described himself as a dark horse in a Democratic field dominated by Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama — neither of whom have yet entered the race.
“There’s a heightened sense of urgency about the condition of the country. But it isn’t just Iraq — there are problems here at home that are huge,” Dodd said. He said he planned to focus on issues like education, energy policy and health care in his campaign."
While he is mistaken if he thinks that Hillary Clinton OR Barrack Obama are dominating anything since both hardly have any record of real leadership in the last 2 years, and we notice these things, I think it is a good thing to see THE ONLY MODERATE SENATOR IN CONNECTICUT throw his name into the race.
I have had it with the farrr-right-wingnuts that try to paint themselves as some sort of moderate centrists when they are really only radicals that are way off to the right of the average American.
Civil Rights: Dodd authored and successfully enacted landmark election reform legislation -- the "Help America Vote Act" -- following the 2000 presidential election to protect the voting rights of all Americans. This law has been called the most important civil rights legislation since the Voting Rights Act of 1965. It strengthens the voting rights of all Americans -- regardless of race, income, or disability -- to better ensure that their votes are counted.
Recognizing the important contributions made by African Americans to American life and history, Dodd co-authored a law to create the National Museum of African American History in Washington, DC.
Senator Dodd is the co-author with Senator Jim Talent (R-MO) of legislation to establish an Unsolved Civil Rights Crime Division at the Department of Justice. This division would be responsible for investigating and prosecuting long-unsolved civil rights crimes against Americanss successfully passed out of the Senate. The legislation passed the Senate in mid-2005.
Civil Liberties: Dodd supports revisions to the USA PATRIOT Act that will strengthen our nation's ability to fight terrorism while preserving Americans' civil liberties, such as the right to privacy. He also is the author, with Sen. Richard Lugar (R-IN), of legislation that would strengthen freedom of speech and freedom of the press by limiting the ability of the federal government to prosecute citizens and journalists for speaking confidentially about abuses of power by government and corporate officials.
Iraq: Washington, Dec 25 (Prensa Latina) Presidential hopeful Senator Christopher Dodd urged the US Administration to withdraw from Iraq.
The Des Moines Register of Iowa says Dodd, a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, termed pointless the US strategy in Iraq and called for an immediate retreat.
''Any time you are chairman of a committee that oversees, arguably, the wealthiest sector of society, that's a significant opportunity to raise some real dough,'' said Chris Lehane, a Democratic strategist from several presidential campaigns. ''But it's potentially a double-edged sword.''
The senator has accepted millions of dollars in contributions from Wall Street interests during his 25 years in the Senate, but his new chairmanship, plus his White House ambitions, have upped the ante.
''It's a tightrope walk when you're the chairman of a committee that regulates the industry that gives the most money to politics, in general,'' said Massie Ritsch, communications director of the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonpartisan watchdog group. ''It has to be tempting to take a lot of money from this industry, because they want to give it so much.''...
I know that there are a lot of other issues that are weaknesses and strengths but those are the ones that, off of the top of my head, I could remember reading about lately.
Do you approve or disapprove of the way George W. Bush is handling the situation with Iraq? Approve 35% Disapprove 42% No opinion 10% Decline to answer 12%
First, let's take a look at Connecticut's exit polls. They show that sending more troops had the support of — get this — 15% of voters! Meanwhile, 63% of voters said some or even all troops should be withdrawn, in complete opposition to Lieberman's real position.
Second, given the total number of people who cast their vote for Lieberman, it's nothing short of absurd to say that it's in any way indicative of anything national. According to the final results, a total of 563,725 people voted for Lieberman — in other words, just over half a million in a nation of 300 million people.
Finally, Lieberman won because he was able to misrepresent his views on Iraq, not because voters agreed with his actual views on the subject. Back in July, Lieberman actually said he thought we'd be able to draw down "significant" numbers of troops by now. What's more, Lieberman worked hard to blur the line between himself and Ned Lamont on the Iraq issue. In one ad, for instance, he spoke of wanting to "bring our troops home from Iraq."
PING... Just using "echo location" to point out how much further to the left the people of Connecticut are compared to Joe "Right-Wingnut" Lieberman.
According to Sally Falkow at The Leading Edge widespread Spocko coverage is having a bit of an effect:
Disney Takes Hard Line with Blog Critic: "Now it’s making the jump to mainstream media. Fast Company picked up the Media Post item of how one blogger took on Disney – and won. “His letter to KSFO’s advertisers resulted in Netflix, MasterCard, Bank of America, and most recently, Visa have pulled their advertising from the station. According to Spocko, Federal Express, AT&T and Kaiser Permanente are weighing their departure as well.”
There’s a groundswell of support for Spocko in the blogosphere and the Electronic Frontier Foundation is defending him. It will be interesting to see how it plays out."
Hundreds of posts ioon this and the media is perking up it's ears a little, but all Disney will say up to now is "No Comment."
Oh yeah! you Disney and ABC pukes have crossed over into territories previously unknown to yourselves when it comes to our PROTECTED FREEDOM to editorialize your characters in this way as a reasonable social commentary on your corporations' ethics as long as you continue to endorse the hate spewing out of those KSFO idiot-radio-hosts' mouths...
And just like these posts... Those satires will saturate the net. Think about that you Disney-ding-dongs.
"Apparently state police employees were trolling the internet, blog sites prior to the inauguration seeing if anyone was talking about any type of interference of the Inauguration. And they encountered Ken Krayeske's one post that to me is not at all threatening..."
Check the stats on your sitemeter.
I am sure you will all find visits from the "State of Connecticut" in your stats. I know that I get visits from them everytime I post something on Jodi Rell.
Also, as a side note, there are usually many visits from federal government sites. If you monitor them close enough you will find visits from sites that are ".gov" and ".mil", etc., littering your sitemeter logs at times.
A sample taken from the "Details" stats on my sitemeter that "SOMEONE" from the State of CT government GOOGLED on "ken krayeske":
Domain Name ct.gov ? (United States Government)
IP Address 159.247.2.# (State of Connecticut)
ISP State of Connecticut
Location
Continent : North America
Country : United States (Facts)
State : Connecticut
City : East Hartford
Lat/Long : 41.7776, -72.6214 (Map)
Language English (United States)
en-us
Operating System Microsoft WinXP
Browser Internet Explorer 6.0
Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1)
Now... I am not saying that this particular visit was neccessarily the malicious kind of visit that resulted in Krayeske's harrassment... It could have been a government employee goofing off on taxpayers time. LOL!
But take a hard look at your Stats. The visits from various government agencies are logged there and their originating Domains, IP, and ISP stats, etc., are pretty easy to recognize.
If we wanted we could probably piece together enough info from various Bloggers stats and figure out just who is watching us. But it sure would be easier on on us if Granny Paranoia Rell just released THE LIST.
Forget Keith Olbermann's "Worst Person In The World" contest — it's now been completely upstaged by a new Sunday contest on Fox: Sean Hannity's "Enemy of the State" award. Last night, Hannity's new Sunday night program aired for the first time, and from here on he'll award his "Enemy of the State" prize — a term originating with ancient Roman dictators placing bounties on rivals — on whatever red-state abortionist, anti-war activist, or run-of-the-mill Democrat who has attracted Hannity's ire that week.
If all it takes is labeling Hannity as the bush-news-whore that he is, well? See for yourself:
Keith Olberman gave you a measly bronze for your obvious rip-off of his "Worst Person In The World". I'll just leave your whoring self with this last thought:
Sean Hannity is the "Enemy of the People"... You know? "We The People" that know you for the bastard-bush-news-whore that you are.
